zwu.kernel@gmail.com writes:
> The patch is based on the latest QEMU upstream. If you will backport the> patchset to QEMU 1.0, pls note the difference.
I would indeed quite like to backport this to qemu 1.0! Am I right in
thinking the sanest way to do this is to apply 922453bca6a9 to bring all the
relevant qemu_aio_flush() calls through the same place before I apply your
patch?
Best wishes,
Chris.

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:18 AM, Chris Webb <chris@arachsys.com> wrote:
> zwu.kernel@gmail.com writes:>>> The patch is based on the latest QEMU upstream. If you will backport the>> patchset to QEMU 1.0, pls note the difference.>> I would indeed quite like to backport this to qemu 1.0! Am I right in> thinking the sanest way to do this is to apply 922453bca6a9 to bring all the> relevant qemu_aio_flush() calls through the same place before I apply your> patch?
For how to backport it to qemu 1.0, i don't know how to help you, sorry.
>> Best wishes,>> Chris.

Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:18 AM, Chris Webb <chris@arachsys.com> wrote:> > I would indeed quite like to backport this to qemu 1.0! Am I right in> > thinking the sanest way to do this is to apply 922453bca6a9 to bring all the> > relevant qemu_aio_flush() calls through the same place before I apply your> > patch?> For how to backport it to qemu 1.0, i don't know how to help you, sorry.
For the list archives: the patches backport fine to qemu 1.0 with
on top of cherry-picked 922453bca6a9, dbffbdcfff69, e8ee5e4c476d.
Time for us to test them a bit...
Cheers,
Chris.